Resistance to flu drug widespread in US: study

[icarus]

And this would be why I don't get a flu shot:

Resistance to flu drug widespread in US: study

Viruses are highly adaptive. We've overused antibiotics. Many antibiotics are now ineffective. Now three flu drugs are ineffective: rimantadine and amantadine and Tamiflu. It's obvious to me that we've overused flu vaccines. Those should be for small children, the sick, and the elderly. Not pushed by companies that don't want to pay for sick days.

In other news: looking at a mountain of work for school.

Starting. That's the hard part. Starting.


ETA: Folks keep thinking that I'm mixing up vaccines with the drugs used to treat influenza. No. I'm not.

Doctors will still say get the flu vaccine, the same way they used to prescribe antibiotics like candy.

I was leery back in the 80s when everyone was prescribed an antibiotic for everything.

I evaded the antibiotics then. I'm not a bit surprised to find they were overused to the point of uselessness. People argued with me then, too.

Now I'm not buying it on the flu vaccines.

This is just one person's anecdotal observation, but I've noticed the flu season has been getting worse and worse. That spike began in the mid-to-late 90s when flu vaccines started being used to inoculate everyone who'd take it, and not just the vulnerable. (Actually, the spike started when flu vaccine makers began marketing to businesses that they'd have less loss of productivity if they got their employees to take it.)

Mark my words. In three to five years we'll start seeing studies that show an increase in the severity and number of flu viruses. In ten, we'll see a link between overuse of flu vaccines and the sheer variety and severity of flus.

Flu vaccines just aren't the same as your typical mumps, rubella, etc. vaccine. Viruses mutate. That constant mutation is why the flu vaccine has to be different each year, and why it only includes an immunization for the top seven or eight viruses the CDC guesses will be the "bad ones" for the season.

Comments

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

But the antiviral drugs are not the same thing as the vaccines. It sounds more to me like we've overused the antivirals and most of the common strains have developed resistance to THOSE, and the only way left to stay protected against flu IS to be vaccinated, because once again there's no treatment.

[keenoled.livejournal.com]

Antibiotics don't work on viruses at all, actually. They're for bacteria.
But anyway, saw a documentary about resistent bacteria, and they asked an American doctor about whether or not he would give out antibiotics to a patient who's sick form a virus. He said he would, knew it wouldn't help, but that he saw himself as more of a service minded profession rather than a healing one. That scared me.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

No, they aren't the same. And the doctors will say get the flu vaccine, the same way they used to prescribe antibiotics like candy.

I was leery back in the 80s when everyone took an antibiotic for everything. I evaded the antibiotics then.

I'm not a bit surprised to find they were overused to the point of uselessness.

Now I'm not buying it on the flu vaccines.

This is just one person's anecdotal observation, but I've noticed the flu season has been getting worse and worse. That spike began in the mid-to-late 90s when flu vaccines started being used to inoculate everyone who'd take it and not just the vulnerable.

Mark my words. In three to five years we'll start seeing studies that show an increase in the severity of flu viruses. In ten, we'll see a link between overuse of flu vaccines and the sheer variety and severity of flus.

Flu vaccines just aren't the same as your typical mumps, rubella, and so forth. Viruses mutate.

[toyniffler.livejournal.com]

Ok I think you are confusing two different ways of treating viral infections. All the drugs you mention are viral antibiotics, not vaccines. I agree that overuse of antibiotics, weather geared towards bacteria or virus is a problem. Resistance to antibiotics will cause a lot of trouble now and in the future.
Now vaccines are a different kettle of fish, and in my opinion cannot be overused. They make your body produce antibodies that'll kill the virus on sight or in the best scenario you don't get infected at all. No resistance towards vaccines have been recorded, they are very specifially geared towards specific viruses so a "flu vaccine" generally consists of vaccine for several types of flu-virus. Since flu virus evolve quite rapidly they sometimes get obsolete and need to be upgraded to reach peak performance once again. This isn't a big problem since making new vaccnies for flu is easy as long as you know what strain of virus is causing your specific outbreak. A consistent vaccine regimen can eradicate less adaptable virus than the flu, for example the small pox and in many parts of the world the measles.
As I said I agree with you in using less antibiotics, but do not confuse them with vaccines.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Oh, I didn't say they use antibiotics on flus. The article is referring to the drugs they use to treat severe, life-threatening cases of influenza, and I'm referring to the overused flu vaccines, betting they're being overused to the point of increasing the severity and mutation of the manifold flu viruses.

But on to your point... they used to give people antibiotics for viruses all the time back in the 80s. Now they're more conscious, but it's hard for a doctor to tell a patient, "You'll just have to suffer through it."

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not.

Read my replies to the other comments first.

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

They must have moved the article, your link doesn't get you there anymore:

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE5214YM20090302

That's the URL that worked for me. Interesting article: we've created super-bug bacteria through the over-use of antibiotics, now we seem to be creating super-viruses through the over-use of antivirals. A hospital-created super-bacteria got my father last month -- it's called C-diff and he died of septicemia, which had nothing to do with why he was in the hospital in the first place. I don't relish the idea of following in his footsteps by someday dying of a super-virus caused by over use of antivirals.

But flu vaccines =/= to antivirals. Flu vaccines introduce a tiny bit of weakened or dead flu virus into the patient's body so that their body will be able to fight off a larger exposure to the flu later on with the creation of antibodies (the patient's body fights the flu, not the vaccine itself.) For many reasons, vaccines don't always work, hence the patients who got the flu despite getting the vaccine -- but that's not because vaccines have created tougher viruses.

Hope your mountain of work soon looks like a mere molehill!

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

No, they're not. And I didn't say they were. Read my replies to the other comments.

[keenoled.livejournal.com]

Haha, thank god you knew that, people usually don't! Phew.
Antiviral doesn't exist in Europe.
And, frrrt, welcome to Europe btw, our doctors don't give a sh*t. *grin* They'll be like 'Oh yeah, and what am *I* supposed to do about it? Go away.' Or possibly use the word Suffer in a gleeful manner.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

Measles, mumps, and rubella are viruses too. *Some* viruses mutate, and flu is one of them.

I still think that resistance-to-antivirals is more directly linked to use of antivirals than it is to the vaccines.

I don't think the vaccines are going to become useless, except for years when they guess the strain wrong (like last year). Unless you've got multiple anecdotal of people who got the shot *this* year and still got the flu?

I have read theories that flu viruses are mutating faster now because of rural Chinese farming practices that allow the virus to pass back and forth between poultry, pigs, and humans with great ease, facilitating changes, and that increased travel between China and the West lets these newly changed strains spread more rapidly.

[spock74.livejournal.com]

Well, speaking as someone who could literally die if I do get the flu, I'll take my chances that they picked the right strain to vaccinate against this year. There are certainly jillions of others that could also kill me, but why not at least take precautions against one of the more common ones?

[ncp.livejournal.com]

I agree completely. Flu vaccines are useless, which is why I have never gotten one (well, not true. I allowed myself to be talked into taking one when I was pregnant). My son hasn't ever had one either. Maybe next year when he's in daycare I'll think about it.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I still think that resistance-to-antivirals is more directly linked to use of antivirals than it is to the vaccines.

Well, yes, of course. My concern is the increase in the severity and number of flu viruses.

The flu vaccines will never become useless because the vaccinations are different every year.

I have read theories that flu viruses are mutating faster now because of rural Chinese farming practices that allow the virus to pass back and forth between poultry, pigs, and humans with great ease, facilitating changes, and that increased travel between China and the West lets these newly changed strains spread more rapidly.

That would square with what happened to the Native American and South American populations in the 15th century, when European settlers brought influenza with them.

But increased travel doesn't account for the spread across the US.

It could be as simple as the person who gets the vaccine is unaware they are a carrier of the flu because they don't have any symptoms. Thus they don't take precautions to separate themselves, aren't careful to wash their hands, etc., and flus spread more widely among those who didn't get the inoculation, or who are vulnerable for whatever reason. The flu vaccine companies have already proved that they can't produce enough vaccine to inoculate every man, woman and child in the US. The law of unintended consequences.

The increased severity of the flu viruses is another matter altogether. That's where I suspect the vaccines are pushing viruses to mutate more rapidly and into more dangerous strains.

[pokemonjuggler.livejournal.com]

I'm just wondering how you are making the jump to us overusing vaccinations from that article when the only part about vaccines in there is about how sometimes it doesn't work, which you can say about other vaccines as well. The vaccine helps to build up your immune system by allowing your cells to build up antibodies, while antibiotics combat the bacteria themselves. They work in different ways and as far as I know, there isn't really a way that they could somehow be immune to vaccines, since the vaccine is just about improving your own immune system's reaction to a specific strain of the virus and does not have anything to do with how the virus mutates.

Where else are you getting this information besides just the article or if you could explain more about why you think it's obvious that we have overused vaccines?

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

If you're part of the vulnerable population, you should definitely get the vaccine.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Read my other comments, I've already gone over this.

[wenelda.livejournal.com]

I never get a flu vaccination and I've never had the flu. I'm incredibly leery of the overuse of antibiotics, so I never go to the doctor unless I seriously can't figure out what's wrong because I don't want to be over-medicated to the point that something as simple as tylonol doesn't work for me.

[fiatincantatum.livejournal.com]

I've read your other comments.

I think you're confused about how antibiotics/antivirals and vaccines work.

Antibiotics(and antivirals) work like poisons. They kill all targets that don't have a resistance to them. In a perfect world, they're taken long enough that the surviving targets are very very few and the body's own defenses can mop them up. In the world we live in, people don't take the entire regimen, or take it intermittently, allowing stronger targets to survive and multiply. Over-prescription and lack of monitoring of people taking antibiotics has let to multiple drug resistant strains.

A vaccine operates like a wanted poster. It wakes up your own body's defenses and shows them a picture of the target. Then, when the target shows up, the body is already aware of the problem and revved up for it.

It's possible (even likely) to overuse antibiotics. It's not possible to overuse vaccines.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

It could be as simple as the person who gets the vaccine is unaware they are a carrier of the flu because they don't have any symptoms. Thus they don't take precautions to separate themselves, aren't careful to wash their hands, etc., and flus spread more widely among those who didn't get the inoculation, or who are vulnerable for whatever reason. The flu vaccine companies have already proved that they can't produce enough vaccine to inoculate every man, woman and child in the US. The law of unintended consequences.

And, given that the flu virus is hardier outside the body than many others, that makes a lot of sense. So there's less of a firebreak effect from vaccinated people than there is for less hardy viruses that require an infected human host for transmission. The vaccinated person won't get infected, but can spread it through surface-to-surface contamination, having picked it up on their hands from someone who IS sick. (They won't spread it via airborne droplets, though.)

I'm not as convinced as you that the vaccines are pushing the viruses to get more dangerous -- because I'm not sure that "more dangerous" is an effective strategy for viral reproduction in the face of vaccines. Resistant-to-antivirals is a super effective strategy in the face of widespread antvirals, of course.

(this got wordy, I will continue)

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

The CDC doesn't include every flu virus they know of that year in each season's vaccine. That would be prohibitively expensive. So they make a guess at what they think will be the top seven or flus. The vaccine is a "greatest hits."

A few years ago their guess was wrong, and there was a severe shortage of the flu vaccine because the makers had to gear up a different vaccine, ASAP.

So if you get the flu when you've had the shot, that's why. You got one of the versions they didn't cover.

rikibeth points out that it's been theorized that the increase in virus mutation has been the result in Chinese farming practices.

I buy that. The increase in travel between China and the west would spread the viruses.

But I also think the viruses are spreading more widely because those inoculated are still carriers. Since they don't have any symptoms they take no precautions to prevent spreading the virus to those who don't have the vaccine. And the vaccine companies can't vaccinate every man, woman and child in the U.S.

Now my gut instinct says that when a large portion of the population can resist a virus -- well okay. Ideally, viruses become weaker and less effective, and pretty soon the flu is a thing of the past.

But that doesn't seem to happen.

What seems to happen is the next generation of viruses are better, bigger, stronger.

I look around at the increasingly severe flu season, and I don't think it's all China.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

I do think that the likely more rapid mutation -- whether driven by widespread vaccines or caused by a really useful pig-poultry-human incubation cycle -- might lead to more people being affected, because the strains will be DIFFERENT enough from previous years' versions to hit more people and hit them harder -- a lot of the reason that some people get "mild" cases of the flu is that they have partial immunity from the last time a related strain came around. So if, say, Hong Kong A came around in 1968, and you were alive then, and caught it, and the next time a Hong Kong A showed up was, say, 1982 (I am making these years up, but it's based on reading I did when I had the flu in January, I wanted to know why I wasn't dropping dead as if it were 1918), even though the Hong Kong A would have changed somewhat, you'd still have some antibodies that'd work on it, and you'd have a less severe case.

And it's pure random chance determining whether we get a variant that causes cytokine storms like the 1918 strain -- and if that happens again, we're screwed, and may be somewhat less screwed WITH vaccines than without. Because while they MIGHT be able to treat cytokine storms with ACE inhibitors, IF they catch it fast enough, I have no faith that they'd be able to do this under epidemic conditions, or even that they'd have enough ACE inhibitors manufactured to cover everyone, so vaccination's still the best strategy.

[piplover.livejournal.com]

While in the Army I was forced to get the flu vaccine, and each year I got really sick. The last year they gave everyone experimental drugs, ones that you inhaled and carried an actual strain of the flu. We were basically human lab rats, because it wasn't being marketed yet. My roomate was pregnant at the time and ended up delivering three months early because of it.

I haven't got the vaccine once since I got out, and have only had a very mild case of flu once. I totally agree with you on the vaccine, and think that the pharmaceutical companies have way too much power in this world.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not confused. You've misread my comments.

I never said at any point that vaccines can become ineffective or overused. That's impossible. Especially with the flu virus vaccine, which contains six or seven different flu viruses every year.

I've explained this up-thread.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I do think that the likely more rapid mutation -- whether driven by widespread vaccines or caused by a really useful pig-poultry-human incubation cycle -- might lead to more people being affected, because the strains will be DIFFERENT enough from previous years' versions to hit more people and hit them harder

Yes. And --

-- crap, I have to go to class.

But yes, rapid mutation is a problem. And a greater variety of viruses will hit naturally more people, too.

100% vaccination is the strategy that will work. But we can't do that, the flu vaccine manufacturers aren't able to, and so the result of half-assed immunization is this increasing mutation and wider spread of the flu.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

Hope class goes well, and I'm still not 100% sold on widespread-but-not-total immunization being the key factor in increased pace of mutation, rather than something else, but... you are making MUCH more sense than I thought you were in your initial post. If in ten years we hear it's the fault of the vaccination strategy, I'll admit you were right and I was wrong.